First it was longtime Republican Rep. Bill Young. But I don’t think any political observer would be able to guess who would be the next Republican to consider a quicker timeline in Afghanistan:
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said Wednesday that the United States should reconsider all its options in Afghanistan — including withdrawing more quickly than the current plan.
McCain, the chief congressional critic of President Obama’s plan to remove all U.S. troops from Afghanistan by 2014, said Wednesday that the 2014 timeline to transfer security control to the Afghans should be completely re-evaluated in response to a spike in “insider attacks” and the suspension of most joint operations in the country.
He told reporters that the United States should contemplate keeping a larger force in Afghanistan past 2014, but should also consider removing troops earlier.
“I think all options ought to be considered, including whether we have to just withdraw early, rather than have a continued bloodletting that won’t succeed,” McCain said.
Obviously, this isn’t a complete shift to opposition to the war. But it does indicate that the insider attacks are far more serious than the Administration is making them out to be. McCain has his own sources at the Pentagon and in Afghanistan, no doubt. And his usual answer to any setback in war involves more troops for more years – “maybe 100.” And while he broaches the possibility of more troops here, he also gives strong consideration to just bugging out.
Of course, McCain blames the Obama strategy for this turn of events. But training Afghan forces would have been part of any war fighting strategy he would have come up with as President. Presumably he would still have had army bases like Camp Bastion, which was struck by a Taliban attack last Saturday in an incident McCain compared to the Tet offensive. I doubt McCain would have set a date certain for transfer of security to the Afghans – McCain favored a long-term presence in the country as recently as this year – but unless his plan was to ship all Afghan security forces out of the country, they would have remained in close proximity to the troops, meaning that the insider attacks would have had the opportunity to occur.
I don’t really care why McCain holds his current views. Maybe it’s rank partisanship. Maybe he just wants to tag the operation as another Obama failure. Whatever. If he thinks we should consider a faster timetable for withdrawal, I’m happy to have him on that side of the fence.




19 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Biggest sore loser ever.
Yet McCain voted against the aid for returning troops.
I think they just want to save the dough for Iran
“McCain . . . said Wednesday that the 2014 timeline to transfer security control to the Afghans should be completely re-evaluated in response to a spike in “insider attacks” and the suspension of most joint operations in the country.”
What exactly does McCain have to do with this other than political speech, as if the US alone calls the shots? The word that is missing here is defeat. Do the Afghanis who are fighting to rid their country of the US not figure into “withdrawing more quickly than the current plan”?
US forces are retreating because they are being beaten by people who won’t roll over for the empire. McCain is inconsequential.
How’s this: attention-whore McCain is full of shit.
Anyone got anything else to add?
DDay’s article is very good, and thanks for the reporting. I’m just so cynical about this superannuated hack and his b.s. “pronouncements.”
As Kassandra said, “war hero” McCain has voted against funding for returning Vets. Whatever’s in it for McCain this time around likely has little do with any antiquated notions such as “patriotism,” “doing what’s right,” “national security” or whatever other laughable ideas one might have.
With the level of the insider attacks increasing dramatically, it takes a special kind of gung-ho fanaticism to pimp the notion that we’re doing anything constructive or permanent there. Evidently, McCain’s is slowly evaporating.
The problem for the next corporate shill of a preznint, whichever one of the two contenders he is, is going to be keeping Karzai propped up without lots of propper-uppers. Without a substantial military presence to provide just the illusion of “central government” that now exists, the place will revert to warlord/Taliban control. No pipelines; and no lucrative mineral resources for western corporations to exploit. Just back to the same old tribal and religious factionalism.
Then we’ll be hearing shreiks about “who lost Afghanistan?!!!”
The short of it is, the bill for years of bloody, savage, dishonest, imperial stupidity hasn’t even begun to come due, yet.
We need to end the war in Afghanistan and redirect the savings to an as yet unnamed evil doing country:____________ ( insert MID choice here ) so that we can keep the economy running smoothly for the 1%ers who benefit from the rising stock prices and dividends it generates. This was a free translation for those who have a hard time understanding what Sen. McCain is actually saying. Or, for the low information voter: 2 wars bad, 1 war good.
Jer, agree 100%. If they had a Nobel Prize for Losers, he’d win it.
Did you know he holds the record for most appearances on NBC’s MTP EVER????
McCain picked Palin to be in the line for the Presidency. To hell with him and to hell with his opinions about anything.
As always, you’ve pretty well covered it!
May I compliment you on your insight as well.
For the new war, I’d like to niminate Canada. They’re close, have oil, and practically no army.
second?????
I think despite his “US Senator” status, his “celebrity” status should be indefinately revoked.
Now if I could just proofread. That’s MIC, not MID and to be more accurate it should read 2 old wars bad, 1 new war good.
“Just back to the same old tribal and religious factionalism.”
And in a flip of the old coin…a quote from our own delusional corporate shill of a President
“And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade …
The Great Wheel goes ’round.
How about redoing the American civil war? think of the savings in fuel alone!
anyway, you already have our oil, so why bother?
Canada has already surrendered to Houston, good choice, how hard could it be?
Why is McCain still considered relevant?
We desperately need a “W”. After starting 6-0, we’re down to 7-2-2.
Not surprising. Joe Scarborough and other Republicans have been saying this for a couple of years now.
Apparently, for many Republicans, wars under a Republican President are good and wars under a Democratic President are bad.
Sadly, for many Democrats, wars under a Democratic President are good and wars under a Republican President are bad.
To hell with what is moral or what is good for the country. Party comes first for far too many, both in and out of public office.